Loyalitätsgespräch is a loyalty interview that, as of 2026, is held during every naturalization procedure in Germany to check knowledge of the constitution, recognition of basic rights, and the absence of anti-constitutional views.

In short

  • In 2026, the loyalty interview (Loyalitätsgespräch) became more detailed and extensive, taking about 30–40 minutes out of an overall 2-hour procedure.
  • To prepare, it’s enough to go through 16 core questions and the extended list of 100 questions — this takes 20–30 minutes.
  • Liking or sharing a post from an organization hostile to the constitution counts as support, even if the post itself is neutral.
  • Holocaust denial is a criminal offense in Germany, not a matter of freedom of opinion.
  • The interview isn’t recorded, so a refusal can be challenged — except in cases of refusal due to genuinely not speaking German.

What Loyalitätsgespräch Is and Why It Was Introduced

The loyalty interview is a conversation that, in practice, some naturalization offices hold as part of the procedure: an official discusses with the applicant their knowledge of the constitution, recognition of basic rights, and the absence of anti-constitutional views. No officially fixed format for such an oral interview exists nationwide — the only mandatory elements are the written loyalty declaration (Loyalitätserklärung) and the solemn declaration made before the naturalization certificate is issued. Formally, the procedure is called neither a test nor an inspection, but precisely a conversation: questions are asked in a conversational format, not as a written exam.

This kind of conversation is now held at every naturalization, but it was specifically in 2026 that the procedure became more detailed and extensive than before. In one described case, the entire procedure at the Cottbus office took 2 hours, of which the loyalty interview itself was only part of that time.

Preparing for the Interview: How Much Time It Takes and What You May Receive in Advance

The loyalty interview itself takes roughly 30–40 minutes. In practice the range is wider: applicants report conversations as short as 3–4 minutes, and others lasting a full hour — there is no official statistic on the length of such an interview, as it all depends on the particular official and how the conversation unfolds.

Before the scheduled naturalization date, some officials email an information sheet (Merkblatt) with materials for the interview in advance — but not every office does this, and not every official within the same office does either. If such an email arrives, it directly asks the applicant to read the document beforehand and prepare using it.

For self-preparation, a set of 16 core questions with a brief explanation and examples of correct and incorrect answers is enough, along with an extended list of 100 questions and answers in the same format. Going through these materials takes about 20–30 minutes before the naturalization date — after that, an applicant is considered sufficiently prepared for the conversation.

How to prepare

It’s enough to go through the 16 core questions with sample answers and the extended list of 100 questions — this takes 20–30 minutes before the naturalization date.

How to Prepare for the Loyalty Interview

Equality, Freedom of Opinion and Religion: The Interview’s Opening Questions

The first block of questions is based on Article 3 of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz) — equal rights for men and women. The correct answer here is extremely simple: a husband has no right to forbid his wife from working or studying — she decides that herself. The same logic applies to a question about a daughter who wants to choose her own partner: she can decide this on her own, without parental interference.

The next question asks what freedom of opinion under Article 5 of the Basic Law means. The point is that everyone has the right to express their opinion, but must also obey the law. In Germany, you can say almost anything as long as it doesn’t violate another person’s rights — an insult is no longer considered a protected expression of opinion, but goes beyond that boundary.

The fifth question in this block is whether religion can be criticized, or whether one can have no religion at all. The answer is unambiguous: yes, faith is free, and everyone may believe whatever they want, or not believe at all. This freedom is enshrined in the Basic Law — citing a specific article or paragraph is not required; referring to the constitution in general is enough.

What to Do If a Question Is Unclear

The phrasing in the interview is sometimes made deliberately more complex. If a question is unclear, it’s best to directly ask for it to be repeated or explained, rather than trying to guess the answer. It’s important to stay calm and not answer too broadly: a long, elaborate answer more often triggers follow-up questions, whereas a short, to-the-point answer usually closes the topic.

If a question is unclear

It’s better to directly ask for the wording to be repeated or explained than to guess the answer. A short, to-the-point answer usually closes the topic faster than a long one.

Criticizing the Government, Banned Organizations and Social Media

The federal government can be publicly criticized — this is allowed and expected during the interview. The correct answer to such a question is short: yes, criticizing the government is permitted, but it’s best not to drag it out, otherwise the official will start asking follow-up questions. For comparison, the interview often brings up East Germany, where openly calling the government bad was unsafe — in today’s Germany, no such restriction exists.

The next block of questions concerns membership in organizations that oppose democracy or human rights, and raising money for groups that support violence or extremism. Here applicants are asked directly: have you ever belonged to such an organization, and have you ever donated money to it? A separate question may come up about whether the AfD party is considered an organization hostile to the constitution — there’s no unambiguous “yes” answer at the time of the interview, although such an assessment does exist among part of society.

The most attention should be paid to the question about posts on social media — Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok. Applicants are asked whether they share posts that incite violence or hatred against groups of people. The problem is that liking or sharing content from an organization hostile to the constitution counts as support — even if the post itself is on a neutral topic like lower electricity prices, while the source organization itself is the one hostile to the constitution. Repeated reposts of such content have already kept people from obtaining citizenship — the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Verfassungsschutz) partly screens candidates’ social media, so it’s worth being careful with likes and reposts during the naturalization application period.

liking or sharing content from an organization hostile to the constitution counts as support — even if the post itself is on a neutral topic like lower electricity prices, while the source organization itself is the one hostile to the constitution

Another question goes like this: what would you do if friends online call for violence against those who disagree? The right strategy is not to get flustered, to ask for the question to be repeated if it isn’t fully clear, and to firmly state that such calls cannot be supported, promoted, or shared, even if their author is a close friend. Supporting violence is never acceptable in Germany, and applicants are expected to hold a consistent democratic position, not make exceptions for acquaintances.

A naturalization candidate checks their smartphone: likes and reposts on social media are reviewed by Verfassungsschutz
Social media under watch

Verfassungsschutz partly screens candidates’ social media. Repeated likes and reposts of content from organizations hostile to the constitution have already kept people from obtaining citizenship.

Human Dignity, the Holocaust, and Israel

The question about human dignity under Article 1 of the Constitution (Grundgesetz) comes up in nearly every loyalty interview — officials ask it routinely, regardless of who is in front of them. The phrasing is usually direct: what does human dignity mean to you under Article 1?

The answer comes down to one point: no one has the right to humiliate another person. All people have equal dignity, and this principle is the foundation on which the other basic rights are built — it isn’t a classic right on par with the others, but the ground the others stand on.

From there the conversation moves to a more sensitive topic — the Holocaust and Germany’s responsibility. The question goes: what do you know about the Holocaust and Germany’s responsibility? This topic is examined in more depth than others precisely because it concerns one of the largest crimes committed by Germany, and the official may ask follow-up questions after the first answer.

If a person of Arab origin is part of the naturalization procedure, an additional question is often added: do you recognize Israel’s right to exist? This is a separate topic from the general responsibility for the Holocaust, and it’s phrased specifically as a question about recognizing the right to exist, not about attitudes toward the country’s policy.

Criticizing the policy of the Israeli government is allowed — just as criticizing the policy of any other government, including the German one: criticizing a government is not the same as denying a state’s right to exist or showing hostility toward people of a particular nationality. The boundary is the same as with criticizing the German government: discussing government actions is fine, insulting the government or calling for violence is not.

Holocaust denial stands apart: it isn’t a matter of borderline acceptable opinion, but a criminal offense under the German Criminal Code. Freedom of opinion exists in the country, but Holocaust denial is classified as a criminal act immediately, with no additional conditions.

Holocaust denial is classified as a criminal act immediately, with no additional conditions

Wars of Aggression and the Interviewing Official’s Personal Views

The interview may include a question: are states entitled to start a war of aggression without justification? The correct answer is short — wars of aggression are prohibited, and there’s no need to elaborate further.

Such a question is often followed by a more specific one — for example, about attitudes toward the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Here it’s best to wait for the exact wording of the question and not lay out all of one’s views at once: many topics are politically sensitive, and the official conducting the interview is an ordinary person with their own political sympathies. One may sympathize with one side of the conflict, another with the other side, and a third may not be interested in the topic at all.

This is the point of such questions: the loyalty interview is not a platform for political debate. Applicants aren’t asked to take a side in a conflict, but are checked for the absence of anti-constitutional views. All the detailed questions ultimately come down to a few basic principles: rejecting war and violence, and the unacceptability of persecuting anyone based on religion, origin, or gender. Sticking to these principles in answers reduces the risk of saying something excessive and hurting one’s own case.

An official and an applicant sit at a table during the final part of the loyalty interview before naturalization

If You Previously Supported an Extremist Group: What to Write in the Loyalitätserklärung

The final, 16th question of the interview concerns past support for an extremist organization — a group that German law recognizes as hostile to the constitution. If such an episode occurred, it isn’t hidden, but explained in the loyalty declaration (Loyalitätserklärung): the prior connection with the group existed but ended.

The declaration should state a specific period — when the support began and when it ended. Simply acknowledging the fact isn’t enough: the applicant needs to show, through actions or a written explanation, that they have moved away from those views, and describe why they won’t return to them in the future.

The form the support took matters for how the situation is assessed. It could be a monetary donation to the organization, formal membership in it, or reposting posts and videos on Facebook or YouTube. The declaration needs to state exactly how the contact with the group came about and why that support arose in the first place.

The degree of fault differs accordingly: membership in an organization whose members committed crimes against humanity is not the same as sharing other people’s posts on social media. The declaration must honestly describe the exact form the support took, rather than downplaying it.

German Language Assessment and What Happens If You Fail the Interview

There’s no separate language test during the loyalty interview, but the level of one’s German becomes apparent on its own over the course of the conversation. A language certificate is required for naturalization — and if a person doesn’t speak German at all, this becomes obvious precisely during the interview. In the past this was easier to get around; nowadays a forged certificate or a formal confirmation without real language knowledge is revealed almost immediately during the interview. If a candidate can’t string together a couple of words, something went wrong at the stage of confirming the language level — and the office will notice.

The interview isn’t recorded — no written transcript of the answers is kept, and there are formally no uniform criteria for what counts as a correct or incorrect answer. Because of this, a refusal following the interview can potentially be challenged: the absence of a transcript and of formally fixed evaluation criteria weakens the office’s position in a dispute, but the outcome of an appeal depends on the specific circumstances of the case and the court’s decision — the result cannot be guaranteed in advance.

The exception is a language problem: if the reason for refusal is that the applicant genuinely doesn’t speak German, there’s nothing to contest — the issue lies with the language certificate itself, not with the subjectivity of the interview. If the interview is failed specifically as a Loyalitätsgespräch, a second attempt within the same application isn’t possible — a new naturalization application has to be filed.

The interview isn’t recorded

There’s no written transcript and no uniform evaluation criteria, so a refusal can potentially be challenged — except when the reason is genuinely not speaking German.

Frequently asked questions

What happens if you fail the loyalty interview — can you try again within the same application?

No. If the interview is failed specifically as a Loyalitätsgespräch, a second attempt within the same application isn’t possible — a new naturalization application has to be filed from scratch.

Can someone else handle the naturalization procedure on my behalf if my German isn’t good?

No: the loyalty interview is a personal conversation with the applicant, and it’s precisely during this conversation that the applicant’s actual level of German becomes apparent. If the applicant doesn’t speak German at all, this becomes obvious right away, regardless of which certificate was submitted earlier.